The indigenous leaders and the Colombian oligarchy share grandstand ---- There are lines
that should not be crossed or four inches. The Association of Indigenous Councils of
Northern Cauca (ACIN) and the Regional Indigenous Council of Cauca (CRIC), just crossed
one of them ten kilometers. ---- One thing is that representatives of government, general
and farmers brought to popular organizations be courtiers of "guerrilla". Another thing I
do different is that two organizations that are popular world who have participated in
various areas of policy convergence of various social sectors, involved political
platforms broader social solidarity they have received from all the popular field in their
demonstrations of the past. Turns out, when we thought had seen it all, we now have what
was needed: that the ACIN and CRIC, from the hand of the ONIC (National Indigenous
Organization of Colombia) to join the campaign shamelessly pointing against reserve areas
peasant and indigenous and other agricultural organizational expressions.

What was missing: McCarthyism indigenous

"Popular organizations, armed groups, are our brothers, and will fight shoulder to
shoulder with them to defeat our enemies (...) Live indigenous struggles and the struggles
of all Colombians!"
(Manifesto of Santander de Quilichao Command Quintin Lame, 1984)

There are lines that should not be crossed or four inches. The Association of Indigenous
Councils of Northern Cauca (ACIN) and the Regional Indigenous Council of Cauca (CRIC),
just crossed one of them ten kilometers. One thing is that representatives of government,
general and farmers brought to popular organizations be courtiers of "guerrilla". Another
thing I do different is that two organizations that are popular world who have
participated in various areas of policy convergence of various social sectors, involved
political platforms broader social solidarity they have received from all the popular
field in their demonstrations of the past. Turns out, when we thought had seen it all, we
now have what was needed: that the ACIN and CRIC, from the hand of the ONIC (National
Indigenous Organization of Colombia) to join the campaign shamelessly pointing against
reserve areas peasant and indigenous and other agricultural organizational expressions.

Accusations

When ACIN and CRIC have been marked "front of the guerrillas" in the past (eg during Minga
2008 or expulsion of troops from Cerro Berlin in 2012), all the popular movement has
sympathized with them; their chiefs have torn his clothes denouncing this demonization of
government, because they understand the sensitivity of these accusations. But now these
same organizations believe perfectly natural stigmatizing and labeling organizations who
dare to disagree with their bosses in the same way they have been reported in the past.

A statement from the ACIN, dated April 29, condemning the "ideologues of the FARC" for
allegedly sponsoring "within communities, organized groups called Avelinos, RURAL
RESERVES, among others. Which has (sic) the sole purpose of territorial dominance,
ideological, political and hegemonic to obstruct the development of our own organizations.
Another strategy of these organizations FOR GUERRILLA has been the economic advantage of
the need for community awareness and buying the commoners, offering loans and boosting
productive projects that seek to break the structure of indigenous fit "[1]. All of a
return to the Manichean thinking that divides Indians into good and bad (obedient vs.
Guerrillas), set in counterinsurgency ideology "remove the water from the fish" regardless.

Even the language you have used is embarrassingly similar to that used by Uribe. In 2007,
Uribe shouted that "every time the guerrillas and their followers feel that they can be
defeated, the resource to which appeals against the violation of human rights." Today, as
part of the "trial" indigenous six villagers for allegedly belonging to the FARC-EP,
Alcibiades Escué, leader of CRIC that 2004 was arrested for the alleged misappropriation
of funds Indian health system to finance the paramilitaries, in terms not unlike those of
Uribe, attacks to a human rights organization, "the trial is now going to give it to
punish villagers (...) but do not delay in taking out a statement saying the council
violates human rights (...) and to the NGO advocate Human Rights Francisco Isaías
Cifuentes, saying that is violation of human rights and international humanitarian law ".

This is not new. Last year, amid the conflict over the eviction of Mount Berlin in Cauca
and multiple tensions between farmers, indigenous and afro, an article called "The Cauca
and compensation of Memory" signed by Efrain Jaramillo, an anthropologist who says he was
adviser to the CRIC. In this article, together with a number of inaccuracies, rash
accusations and attacks free sectors of the popular movement, accusing organizations like
the "Landless Movement Grandchildren Quintin Lame" and "Indian Association Avelino Ul"
being facades of the guerrilla movement . The unfounded accusations and inaccuracies of
this article have already been refuted in another time and I will not dwell on them [2].
Contributing to this atmosphere of suspicion and criminalization of popular protest,
Feliciano Valencia CRIC leader said in an interview with Semana, the fight with the
farmers was for control of the drug economy (sic) and "Indians "had decided" to take up
the matter "[3].

Persecution

And indeed they have taken "action on the matter". In a frenzy McCarthy, CRIC and ACIN
guards have mobilized their indigenous to advance a true offensive against, betraying boys
who have real or imagined sympathy with the insurgency and guerrilla camps harassing.
Incidentally, ONIC, coming from Luis Andrade Evelis condemned the Indian guards "take
matters into" against the military presence in the territories, calling for sanctions
against them [4] and Feliciano Valencia himself in that interview, recognized as an
"error" to the soldiers out of Cerro Berlin, but no such deal with the guerrillas. Is
exaggeration, then, to assert, as does a statement of the FARC-EP, the indigenous movement
has bowed to the state and its security agencies, as well as advanced constitute an
effective counterinsurgency? [5]

Apparently, the rhetoric opposition to all "violent" is translated simply in active
opposition to the insurgency, opposition fits firmly into the model of civil-military
cooperation of the current government. Not surprisingly, Leon Valencia Santos recommended
that the government, after the incident of Cerro Berlin, using the indigenous movement
articulated around the ACIN and CRIC advanced precisely as a counterinsurgency. He said in
his column in Week, which Santos has in these organizations "at hand a true peace movement
with which it can agree ground rules to contain irregular forces without damage to
anything the constitutional order and national sovereignty" [6 ]. Apparently, the
government listened to their advice, and the indigenous movement obediently followed that
line of conduct.

The incident that sparked this series of recriminations between the leaders epistolary
indigenous and peasant and indigenous organizations and the insurgency fariana, was the
capture and "trial" of six suspected militants by the indigenous guard on April 29. Event
widely publicized throughout the media of the regime, which was applauded enthusiastically
by the command of the Third Division of the Army. The trial in question was full of
irregularities, including that there were no guarantees for the proper defense, which
limited the use of the word to the accused, that the assembly was manipulated and not
allowed into the local community of Toribio, being filled the hall with about 800 people
brought from 19 councils and the prosecution never gave evidence against the accused. This
travesty of justice, ended his "lynching" pseudo-legal with the delivery of two of the
defendants to the state to lock in one of the prisons of INPEC. Thus the "Autonomous"
operates this "justice". The sentences given to these two unfortunates were 40, shame it
is not pre-established, having been pulled out from under the sleeve by a CRIC leader who
consulted stronger screaming in the front row if they wanted 10, 20 , 30 or 40 years for
the accused, as is the mob Pilate consulted if they wanted to crucify Jesus or Barabbas
[7]. The same could have been victims of medieval scourges that have nothing to do with
the "uses and customs" but rather indigenous colonial traditions, such as the use of
stocks, the whip, water deprivation or bury the condemned to the neck . These "beauties"
disguise themselves as indigenous justice: do not know why we should accept that basic
human rights such as the right to a proper defense or protection of torture just entering
suspend an indigenous community.

Containment

Beyond the debate about the customs and democratic credentials indigenous authorities
themselves, this trial was indicative of a serious problem as the people's movement
sectors are co-opted by the state for counter-insurgency and to contain popular rebellion.
This has been done since the time of the "clean" liberal guerrillas turned into fierce
anti-communists after being "pacified" by Rojas Pinilla in 1953. Sometimes tech sectors
are sectors counterinsurgency that were once revolutionary and guerrilla or reach an
agreement with the State, become "more Catholic than the Pope" as they say in Creole,
which have their political prestige and privileges mortgaged in maintaining the status
quo. If not, look at some of the advisers who had Alvaro Uribe and today is Juan Manuel
Santos. Although neither the CRIC and the ACIN can still be compared with Carlos Franco
nor a Obdulio Gaviria, the language they use every day is similar to theirs, as already
noted, except for splashing their communications with some progressive phraseology.

The exercise of the "autonomy" much vaunted by indigenous movements is, at best, relative.
As shown powerless against the state, is adamant sectors of popular resistance (both
unarmed resistance and the army) that show differences with the authorities and CRIC
methods or ACIN. Up to openly collaborate with the State (INPEC Army) when it comes to
these sectors contain let themselves be used fully by the establishment counterinsurgency
plans, making them worth the recognition of the media, the military and politicians.
Moreover, we can say that, ultimately, the exercise of this autonomy is guaranteed by a
corrupt state, paramilitarized mafia. What reveals a deeper pathology that affects part of
the Colombian left from the "social contract" signed in 1991 by the new Constitution,
important sectors of the popular movement, at least at the level of leaderships, were
co-opted into the system and now have an objective interest in its maintenance. Those most
vehement attack today social sectors resistance and insurgency are, sometimes, those from
the left "progressive" believe sacred guardians of rule of law. The indigenous movement,
since the "Quintin Lame Armed Movement" lay down their arms in exchange for the
institutionalization of certain benefits under the new Constitution, every day is heading
in this direction more decisively.

As part of this institutionalization, the Indian chiefs speak with the state "authority to
authority" in a fictional situation equivalence and mutual flattery, which creates a gap
between the privileged leadership (who can think up to be candidates for the presidency of
this republic decadent) and the bases of communities, which often resent them and using as
a pressure group when it touches re-negotiate the terms of the "contract" of 1991. So we
have seen situations like indigenous ritual inauguration of Santos in the Sierra Nevada,
Embera Congress in which the leadership of the ONIC Santos frantically applauded as he
called for a "Minga for Democratic Prosperity" [8] and now the complaint and delivery of
suspected insurgents.

The cooptation of the indigenous movement goes hand in hand with this institutionalization
through a fictitious "autonomy" as well as the NGO-ization of the indigenous movement, the
influx of capital from international cooperation, which (especially in the case of
European cooperation and USAID, which funded the indigenous movement, CRIC, ACIN, ONIC)
have political conditions. One of those conditions is to assume an active position
counterinsurgency by fallacious speeches as the "neutrality" and "symmetry" in condemning
all "violent" equally-ignoring the fact that "all" are not equal, nor in its origin, or
its purpose, or methods. That symmetry fallacious, by the same dynamics of power, always
ends criticizing and questioning the 'players' minions at the same state, which eventually
comes to accept him as a guarantor of the sacrosanct rule of law [9]. In this inertia to
please "international cooperation" (which is dominated by governments that share strategic
interests and objectives with the Colombian State and promote the common agenda through
its funding programs) have seen the indigenous movement accusing the end oenegizado
insurgency of "crimes against humanity" and a delirious "extermination plan" of indigenous
peoples. All this stridency is when, interestingly, the Montealegre Prosecutor himself has
said that no convictions for crimes against humanity against guerrilla leaders, at which
the most recalcitrant Uribe have redoubled stridency of their complaints. What are the
elements to blame the insurgency an extermination plan? The existence of a social and
armed conflict has repercussions within indigenous communities and of all rural
communities in Colombia-conflict did not start the insurgency and conflict in which many
Indians are active. Well said the commander killed FARC-EP, Carlos Patiño "Caliche", in an
interview with Hollman Morris 2005 that the neutrality of indigenous authorities was to
ignore the reality of the country, now we see that after the supposed "neutrality "There
is a conscious partisanship.

They have guys who choose to enter the insurgency because they seek alternative leadership
in their rebellion against the system, especially girls, often tired patriarchal
practices, patronage and bureaucratic, not a plan to destroy the indigenous peoples. These
sympathies aroused among indigenous insurgency on foot, as described by the commander of
the FARC-EP Timoleon Jimenez, "for some reason we could define and clarify, seems to
produce some degree of irritation in certain sector of its authorities" [ 10]. That has
criticized the leadership of the CRIC and ACIN, organizations with just a few decades of
existence, does not mean questioning the value of the ancient cultures of our land. That
avoids bruising occasionally isolated people accused of collaborating with the army or
paramilitaries, in the context of this conflict (blows that one can not share and that
social movements do not share, but you have to prove with evidence and not reckless
accusations) is not the same as a "ethnocide". To say that the order of the FARC-EP of his
troops not to get captured by Indian guards is far from the delusional accusation that the
movement has become indigenous "military objective" [11]. Similarly, it has often decide
Indians shake hands with afros and farmers in other organizations, weary of their
traditional organizations or narrow ethnocentric views (often egged on from the academy),
or decide to form different indigenous organizations CRIC and ACIN because they see in
them effective instruments of struggle, not become "para-guerrilla". Nor that makes them
enemies of indigenous communities, communities that existed long before the CRIC, the ACIN
or ONIC. However, as denounced by the Indigenous Partnership Coordinator del Cauca (CAIC),
many of its members and leaders have been vilified and threatened by these leaderships
[12], a fact which no doubt given the caliber of the comments that we have heard these weeks .

Indigenous leaders oenegizados end, as denounced a statement of FOs Cauca, representing
the state to communities, claim shared by many ordinary villagers [13]. They are the
guardians of the community to the establishment, a fact that is exacerbated in the current
authoritarian regime and counterinsurgency. Gramsci said, analyzing Italian fascism, which
he sought to force all organizations "civil society" political police roles fulfilled:

"[It is understood a] broad police, ie not just the state service aimed at the suppression
of crime, but the combined forces organized by the state and individuals (...) to protect
the dominance political and economic elites. In this sense in which some political parties
as well some other economic organizations or gender should be considered entirely
political police organizations, to have a character of research and prevention. "[14]

This is exactly what we see happening in Cauca. In this context, what concerns us is that
to our knowledge there is fear that the Indian guards can be mobilized again to attack
leftist groups in the communities, particularly in sectors related to the CAIC, with
initiatives such as rural reserve areas , the Human Rights Network Francisco Isaías
Cifuentes and Patriotic March. We hope that these fears do not materialize in new attacks,
accusations and deliveries, but we're vigilant.

Unit

We have always raised the importance of unity for the advancement of the popular movement.
We have a formidable enemy, who despite being a tiny minority of society, is well
organized and has a monopoly of economic and political power. The popular sectors, despite
being the majority, they are divided, sometimes opposing each other by secondary
conflicts, disorganized and under the influence of the ideology of the dominant groups.
However, witnessing a moment of consciousness, organization and advance popular struggles
in Colombia. The unit is a political task is the order of the day, and while the Colombian
left as well as many popular movements continue cannibalistic and sectarian dynamics,
important steps have been taken as the Common Social Path for Peace and Comosocol social
and political platforms as the Congress of Peoples Patriotic March and Comosoc, among
others. However, these initiatives towards unity, although methods are renewing politics
often end up playing the same vices of the traditional parties. It is still a mistake that
many of these initiatives, despite the intentions and efforts of many grassroots
activists, are still conceiving from a superstructure. The pattern of many of these
valuable initiatives remains the unit from the top down, where sometimes split the charges
and pre-race prior to solidify the foundation of movements.

It needs to rethink and rethink policy as the horizon for unit movement. Many times we
quiet the criticism of the leadership for the sake of unity. This was finally accepted as
a lesser evil corrupt mayor of Bogota, Samuel Moreno, for example. So we have also quiet
the criticism indigenous movement for the sake of that same unit, only to end up getting
accusations and abuse. In both cases, the result of this silence has been disastrous. We
know that the unity of the resistance of the afros, peasants and indigenous is now a major
issue in Cauca. My question is whether this unit is made to thinking in terms of
traditional authorities denounced, persecuted, point and threaten other expressions of
popular movement that will fight over hegemony.

Arguing the unit can not accommodate pernicious practices that harm the objectives of
popular struggles in the medium and long term. The amplitude of a movement can include a
wide range of political views, but can not include treason, and corruption, and
clientelism. Nor can fall into ambiguous alliances with those who have one foot in the
popular movement and another firmly nailed rotten institutions with whom they claim to
speak from the people but whose political agenda is committed to foreign interests and
often unspecified. There can be no unity with those who speak in code progressive but have
objective interests in maintaining the status quo: the unit is to conceive the human tide
of the underdog, the dispossessed, the marginalized, the exploited, the discriminated
demolishes the economic, political and social that oppress them, so there is a radical
transformation of present misery, whoever falls, although even the sacrosanct constitution
of '91 left standing if necessary.

Nor can we believe that unity is a red that will take the leadership to decide on the
backs of their bases. The unit, above all, must be done from below and in the fight, since
the resistance of these communities walk. The unit is a must with these indigenous bases
left to their own devices, will necessarily drive all bloods and cultures, in the context
of mutual respect and understanding, without hegemony and authoritarian positions. Example
of this unit have been intercultural tables to troubleshoot territory, as happened
recently in Itaibe, municipality of Paez, Cauca-reference of how afros, indigenous and
mestizo peasants can dialogue with arguments and not with sticks, as sadly has happened in
the past, confrontations that are clearly functional to maintaining their power through
popular field division [15]. This is why we raise a heated protest alleged McCarthyism
popular sectors, which dent the communities that these organizations claim to defend, that
sows distrust and disunity in the popular movement, which exacerbates ethnic tensions
(policy have always looked for colonialists to divide and rule), which will counter to the
efforts of the present moment of forming a popular block that can play an alternative
project for Colombian society, at the risk of being run over by locomotives Santistas.

[9] These theories of symmetry and neutrality have been sufficiently challenged by the
works of Father Javier Giraldo (see War or Democracy, for example), as well as Colombia
Project Never Again (see especially Chapter V of Volume I ). The perverse effect of this
alleged symmetry and how it ends counterinsurgency necessarily be an instrument, it
appears from a recent letter by ONIC and CRIC government and the FARC-EP as part of the
peace negotiations. While the government ask just respect IHL, with the insurgency are not
limited thereto but detailing a long list of practices that supposedly REALIZED (which is
questionable in many cases). Not specified, of course, that the State does the same and
ten times worse.
http://www.cric-colombia.org/portal/carta-al-gobierno-nacional-y-las-farc-frente-a-los-dialogos-de-paz-en-cuba/